Skip to main content

Modelling techniques for structural evaluation for bridge assessment

Abstract

Load assessment of existing bridges in Australia is evaluated mainly using beam line model and the grillage analogy to examine the structural integrity of bridge components due to live loadings. With the majority of existing bridge networks designed for superseded design vehicular loading, the necessity to utilise more rigorous analysis methods to assess the load effects of bridges is indispensable. In this paper, various vehicular loading cases on a grillage model of a box girder bridge and its equivalent finite element model (FE) are considered, and their applicability for bridge assessment using structural health monitoring (SHM) as defined in the new revision of AS 5100.7 is studied. Based on numerical analyses, it was observed that component-level load effects in the two models have notable differences, irrespective of vehicle speed, position and loading. However, when global-level load responses are compared, the discrepancy in analysis outputs drops dramatically. The modelling ratios developed in this paper are practical and will be applicable with any modelling techniques for bridge assessment under vehicular loading on both a global and component-response basis. It was also observed that FE is more efficient in terms of model updating and damage simulation, and hence more appropriate for implementation of SHM techniques. The proposed flowchart suggested for heavy load assessment incorporates detailed and simple modelling approaches aligned with experimental data obtained by SHM techniques, which can be used for periodic and long-term monitoring of bridges. It can enhance the proper determination of bridge condition states, as any conservative estimation of bridge capacity may result in unnecessary load limitations.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11

References

  1. Shaw P, Pritchard R, Heywood R (2014) Bridge analysis: are we data managers or engineers? In: Proceedings of 9th Austroads bridge conference, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia

  2. Morrison S, Moses J (2011) Benefits and uses of FE modelling in bridge assessment and design. In: Proceedings of the 8th Austroads bridge conference, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia

  3. Jamali S, Chan THT, Thambiratnam DP, Ross Pritchard, Nguyen A (2016) Pre-test finite element modelling of box girder overpass-application for bridge condition assessment. In: Proceedings of the Australasian structural engineering conference (ASEC), Brisbane, Australia

  4. Jaeger LG, Bakht B (1982) The grillage analogy in bridge analysis. Can J Civ Eng 9(2):224–235

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Lu P, Li F, Shao C (2012) Analysis of a T-frame bridge. Math Probl Eng 2012. http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2012/640854

  6. Sadeghi J, Fathali M (2012) Grillage analogy applications in analysis of bridge decks. Aust J Civ Eng 10(1):23–36. https://doi.org/10.7158/c10-670.2012.10.1

    Google Scholar 

  7. Yang M, Zhong H, Telste M, Gajan S (2016) Bridge damage localization through modified curvature method. J Civ Struct Health Monit 6(1):175–188. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13349-015-0150-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. McElwain BA, Laman JA (2000) Experimental verification of horizontally curved I-girder bridge behavior. J Bridge Eng 5(4):284–292. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)1084-0702(2000)5:4(284)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Krzmarzick DP, Hajjar JF (2006) Load rating of curved composite steel I-girder bridges through load testing with heavy trucks. In: Structures Congress, 2006. https://doi.org/10.1061/40889(201)149

  10. Queensland Department of Transport and Main Roads (2013) Tier 1 heavy vehicle bridge assessment criteria. Transport and Main Roads (TMR), Queesnland, Australia

  11. Australian Standards (2017) Bridge design—part 2: design loads (AS 5100.2). SAI Global, Sydney

  12. Australian Standards (2017) Bridge design—part 7: bridge assessment (AS 5100.7). SAI Global, Sydney

  13. Pritchard R (2014) AS 5100.7 bridge assessment: 2014 revision. In: Proceedings of the 9th Austroads bridge conference, Sydney, Australia

  14. Pritchard R (2017) Revision of Australian Standard AS 5100 part 7: bridge assessment. In: Proceedings of the 10th Austroads bridge conference, Melbourne

  15. Hambly EC (1991) Bridge deck behaviour, 2nd edn. E & FN Spon, London

    Google Scholar 

  16. Qaqish M, Fadda E, Akawwi E (2008) Design of T-beam bridge by finite element method and AASHTO specification. KMITL Sci J 8(1):24–34

    Google Scholar 

  17. Jenkins D (2004) Bridge deck behaviour revisited. In: Proceedings of the 5th Austroads bridge conference, Hobart, Tasmania

  18. Obrien EJ, Keogh D, O’Connor A (2014) Bridge deck analysis, 2nd edn. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Flordia

    Google Scholar 

  19. Surana C, Agrawal R (1998) Grillage analogy in bridge deck analysis. Narosa, New Delhi

    Google Scholar 

  20. Australian Standards (2017) Bridge design—part 5: concrete (AS 5100.5). SAI Global, Sydney

  21. Reddy JN (2006) Theory and analysis of elastic plates and shells, 2nd edn. CRC Press, Bosa Roca

    Google Scholar 

  22. Moravej H, Jamali S, Chan THT, Nguyen A (2017) Finite element model updating of civil engineering infrastructures: a review literature. In: International conference on structural health monitoring of intelligent infrastructure, Brisbane, Australia

  23. Hambly E, Pennells E (1975) Grillage analysis applied to cellular bridge decks. Struct Eng 53(7):267–276

    Google Scholar 

  24. National Association of Australian State Road Authorities (1976) NAASRA bridge design specification, 5th edn. National Association of Australian State Road Authorities, Sydney

  25. AECOM Australia (2002) Investigating the development of a bridge assessment tool for determining access for high productivity freight vehicles (AP-R398-12). https://www.onlinepublications.austroads.com.au/items/AP-R398-12. Accessed 1 Jun 2016

  26. Lake N, Ngo H, Kotze R (2014) Review of AS 5100.7 rating of existing bridges and the bridge assessment group guidelines (AP-R452-14). https://www.onlinepublications.austroads.com.au/items/AP-R466-14. Accessed 1 Jun 2016

  27. Lake N, Seskis J, Ngo H, Kotze R (2014) Review of axle spacing mass schedules and future framework for assessment of heavy vehicle access applications (AP-R466-14). https://www.onlinepublications.austroads.com.au/items/AP-R466-14. Accessed 1 Jun 2016

  28. Pritchard R, Heywood R, Shaw P (2014) Structural assessment of freight bridges in Queensland. In: Proceedings of the 9th Austroads bridge conference, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia

  29. Schlune H, Plos M (2008) Bridge assessment and maintenance based on finite element structural models and field measurements. Chalmers University of Technology, Göteborg

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The first author is thankful for full financial support provided by Queensland University of Technology. Also, valuable comments provided by Prof. Eugene O’Brien for grillage modelling is appreciated.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tommy H. T. Chan.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Jamali, S., Chan, T.H.T., Nguyen, A. et al. Modelling techniques for structural evaluation for bridge assessment. J Civil Struct Health Monit 8, 271–283 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13349-018-0269-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13349-018-0269-4

Keywords

  • Bridge assessment
  • Grillage analogy
  • Finite element model
  • Load assessment
  • Structural health monitoring